Summary: Lucey, the Cartwrights’ dog, “looks like” a “pit bull.” Salina, KS has had a ban on “pit bulls” since 2005. Lucey was seized, but the Cartwrights fought back, and had the Mars Wisdom Panel genetic test performed. The test results were that Lucey was not a Pit Bull, and had only about 1/8 Staffordshire Bull Terrier in her ancestry. So, a judge said she was not banned under Salina’s law, and refunded the money the Cartwrights had spent defending her. But then, veterinarian David Atherton (a consultant to the Salina Animal Shelter, and the one who initially deemed Lucey to be a “pit bull”) decided that the genetic test results were incorrect. (Because the test uses autosomal chromosomes rather than sex chromosomes; and because “pit bulls aren’t pure-bred”. Besides, he ran the test on his own dog, and got back results that seemed highly questionable; and anyhow, the Mars company itself says the test is not authorized for use in breed ban cases.) So, the Cartwrights are going back to court in March 2010; and the judge will require any scientific evidence to be backed up by expert testimony. Meanwhile, the Cartwrights may be moving away, for employment reasons. It’s not clear from the article exactly where Lucey is being kept while waiting for the new trial — hopefully with her family, and not impounded at the shelter.
Previous alert for Salina: http://stopbsl.com/2009/09/02/salina-ks-dogs-dna-saves-its-life/
Salina disputes DNA test
By DAVID CLOUSTON
Five months ago, Cartwright thought a DNA test had saved Lucey, who looks like a pit bull, after she ran afoul of the city’s breed ban….
Cartwright won her case, based on the results of the genetic test….
Then in November she got a notice … [Salina] was refiling the charge against her of owning a prohibited pit bull… [because] the city prosecutor [thinks] the DNA test is unreliable….
Cartwright has hired an attorney…. Her trial is scheduled to begin in March.
Reporter David Clouston can be reached at 822-1403 or by e-mail at email@example.com.
Full article retrieved Feb. 19, 2010 from http://www.salina.com/news/story/Dog-DNA-2-18-10
Westword is on a roll. Follow the link below to read an excellent article about the recent Denver hearing involving the misidentification of a supposed “pit bull type” dog.
In Denver, Animal Control decides which dogs are pit bulls. But what happens if they’re wrong?
Posted in Breed Identification, Colorado, Court Cases
Tagged animal control, ban, Breed Identification, breed specific legislation, city council, dangerous, DNA test, dog, ordinance, pit bull
By definition, breed-specific legislation requires dogs’ breeds or mixes to be identified. Breed-specific laws are usually written to affect a dog based on that dog’s appearance.
But DNA testing that identifies a dog’s breed or breeds (a science still in its infancy) has shown that visual assessment of a dog’s breed or mix is often incorrect.
The result, of course, is that many dogs that do not possess any of the regulated breeds’ DNA may nevertheless be swept up in BSL simply because they are unlucky enough to have inherited a basic appearance that is considered typical of a regulated breed.
Here are some recent articles about this dilemma, plus an interesting interactive quiz.
The greatest dog breeds you only think you know
Canine Quiz: Can you match the dog to its ancestry? (interactive quiz)
Beagle or Bichon: Can dog drool provide insight?
Think you know a dog’s DNA? Think again
Posted in Breed Identification, Results of BSL, Studies
Tagged animal control, ban, Breed Identification, breed specific legislation, DNA test, dog, pit bull, shelter, stereotype
The dog in question has done nothing wrong. It is merely short-haired and somewhat “muscular.”
Dog Trial: Case Of Mistaken Identity?
Owner Says Miami-Dade Animal Services Has Wrong Dog
POSTED: Saturday, August 1, 2009
UPDATED: 9:44 am EDT August 3, 2009
MIAMI — [...] “Under the DNA tests we took, this dog shows four different breeds, none of which are banned in Miami-Dade County,” she said. Bardawil said according to the test results, Baby Girl is part whippet, not pit bull.
The results did not convince hearing officer Rafael Licea, who said the physical description of Baby Girl satisfied the county’s pit bull definition.[...]
Full article retrieved 8/3/09 from http://www.justnews.com/news/20247837/detail.html
Posted in Breed Identification, Court Cases, Florida, Results of BSL
Tagged ban, bias, breed specific legislation, DNA test, dog, ordinance, pit bull, subjective, visual